Mixed-Method Evaluation to Understand Clinician Perspectives of a Program to Implement High-Intensity Resistance Rehabilitation Into Skilled Nursing Facilities

Abstract

To assess rehabilitation clinicians' viewpoints regarding a multicomponent implementation program aimed at promoting high-intensity resistance rehabilitation (HIR), as well as practical implications for its use in skilled nursing facility (SNF) rehabilitation.

OBJECTIVE

To assess rehabilitation clinicians' viewpoints regarding a multicomponent implementation program aimed at promoting high-intensity resistance rehabilitation (HIR), as well as practical implications for its use in skilled nursing facility (SNF) rehabilitation.Prospective convergent mixed-method design.

DESIGN

Prospective convergent mixed-method design.Eight rural SNFs within the Department of Veterans Affairs.

SETTING

Eight rural SNFs within the Department of Veterans Affairs.Physical rehabilitation clinicians (physical and occupational therapists, physical and occupational therapy assistants, recreational therapists, and kinesiotherapists) who engaged with the implementation program (n=38).

PARTICIPANTS

Physical rehabilitation clinicians (physical and occupational therapists, physical and occupational therapy assistants, recreational therapists, and kinesiotherapists) who engaged with the implementation program (n=38).Clinicians engaged with the multicomponent implementation program to promote the use of HIR in clinical practice. The program components included clinician training (i.e., virtual didactic modules with synchronous case discussions), provision of resources (e.g., equipment, job aids), and facilitated implementation (e.g., external implementation facilitator support, distributed tips and tricks).

INTERVENTIONS

Clinicians engaged with the multicomponent implementation program to promote the use of HIR in clinical practice. The program components included clinician training (i.e., virtual didactic modules with synchronous case discussions), provision of resources (e.g., equipment, job aids), and facilitated implementation (e.g., external implementation facilitator support, distributed tips and tricks).Acceptability of Intervention Measure, Training Acceptability Rating Scale, study-specific questionnaires, and qualitative focus groups exploring perceived acceptability, feasibility, and effect on work experience.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Acceptability of Intervention Measure, Training Acceptability Rating Scale, study-specific questionnaires, and qualitative focus groups exploring perceived acceptability, feasibility, and effect on work experience.Questionnaires revealed high levels of implementation program acceptability and perceived effect, alongside moderate levels of feasibility. Focus group themes supported these findings, explaining high acceptability and effect through differentiation from other trainings and prolonged engagement. Feasibility results were explained qualitatively by facilitatory factors (i.e., team participation, reduced caseloads, training characteristics) and inhibitory factors (i.e., training timing, self-paced scheduling logistics, lack of protected time and space). There was no reported negative effect on clinician work experience.

RESULTS

Questionnaires revealed high levels of implementation program acceptability and perceived effect, alongside moderate levels of feasibility. Focus group themes supported these findings, explaining high acceptability and effect through differentiation from other trainings and prolonged engagement. Feasibility results were explained qualitatively by facilitatory factors (i.e., team participation, reduced caseloads, training characteristics) and inhibitory factors (i.e., training timing, self-paced scheduling logistics, lack of protected time and space). There was no reported negative effect on clinician work experience.According to SNF clinician perspectives, a positive HIR implementation experience may be enhanced through implementation programs that provide prolonged engagement and a self-paced structure with built-in accountability. Leadership and organizational support appear important to protect time and space for clinicians who experience competing priorities to successfully facilitate evidence uptake. Future work can evaluate the applicability across various contexts beyond rural VA SNFs.

CONCLUSIONS

According to SNF clinician perspectives, a positive HIR implementation experience may be enhanced through implementation programs that provide prolonged engagement and a self-paced structure with built-in accountability. Leadership and organizational support appear important to protect time and space for clinicians who experience competing priorities to successfully facilitate evidence uptake. Future work can evaluate the applicability across various contexts beyond rural VA SNFs.